- Joined
- Jul 7, 2020
He seems to be arguing that he's only guilty by the letter of the law, but that he didn't actually do anything that bad and that the evil government and Scandinavian prudes at his church are actually the bad people for fucking with him when he had a good thing going on. Oh, and Sean because he's fat.So my takeaway from the summaries posted thus far is that he's not actually arguing he's technically innocent of the possession charge, but that the evil gooberment and witnesses played dirty.
Notice what he hasn't said (according to the highlights)—anything about the search being unconstitutional, the warrant being bad, or anything else that came up months ago when we had the Barnes crew trying to cover for him. Weird how all of his full-throated arguments from back then have been totally dropped, huh?
Edit: Though I wouldn't be surprised if he tried to touch on them during his public stream because he's reading this thread and realizes that not bringing up any of the constitutional issues makes him look like he was just flailing back then.